Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. MELI scored 77.4, PDD scored 65.9 — MELI leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. MELI's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but PDD's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
MELI
MercadoLibre, Inc.
Internet Retail · Quality-Growth
77.4
$1,889.85 · $95.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.5
MELI leads
PDD
PDD Holdings Inc.
Internet Retail · Quality-Growth
65.9
$81.35 · $115.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestPDD9.2x
Fastest growthMELI+46.0%
Strongest balance sheetPDD0.01
Highest qualityPDD89 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePDD-59%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
MELI
stronger →← stronger
PDD
75
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
89
96
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
69
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
84
PDD is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
MELI
PDD
$12.4bA-
FCF
$16.5bA-
+46.0%A
Rev
+9.7%B
1.69C+
D/E
0.01A
51.4xD
P/E
9.2xA
1.01B+
PEG
0.68A-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
MELI
PDD
58% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
59% below
~-7%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-14%/yr
+86%
1-yr DCF upside
+124%
+141%
5-yr DCF upside
+141%
+248%
10-yr DCF upside
+169%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
MELI
Why this score
Durable high returns
PDD
Why this score
Durable high returns
Foreign reporter (CNY)
The companies
MELIMercadoLibre, Inc.
Internet Retail · $1,889.85 · beta 1.31
Why now
Internet Retail · market cap $95.8b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $2428.00 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +46% — in hypergrowth territory. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $2,276 (implying +20% upside).
Moat
ROE 24% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of cash released from working capital ($7.5b) — a release that doesn't repeat every year the way earnings can. $95.8b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 51.4x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. E-commerce competition — Amazon, Walmart, Shein, and Temu have each forced the rest of the category to compete on price, fulfillment speed, or assortment; sustaining margins requires one of those being structurally defended.
PDDPDD Holdings Inc.
Internet Retail · $81.35 · beta -0.05
Why now
Internet Retail · market cap $115.8b. Down 42% from 52-week high of $139.41 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.68 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 34 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $114.96 (implying +41% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 24% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 120% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 42% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. E-commerce competition — Amazon, Walmart, Shein, and Temu have each forced the rest of the category to compete on price, fulfillment speed, or assortment; sustaining margins requires one of those being structurally defended.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
The model favors MELI with a 75.8 score, driven by its exceptional Growth pillar of 98 and +41.2% revenue expansion. A contrarian, however, could prefer PDD for its deeper -69% discount to fair value and the market's extremely low implied growth of -16% per year. Investors should note PDD's 'Foreign reporter (CNY)' caution signal.
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where MELI and PDD diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.5 points in favor of MELI. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthMELI 96.4 · PDD 69.1MELI +27.3
ValueMELI 64.3 · PDD 84.4PDD +20.1
QualityMELI 74.9 · PDD 89.1PDD +14.2
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is MELI or PDD the better stock?
MELI scores higher: MELI 77.4, PDD 65.9 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do MELI and PDD differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where MELI leads by 27 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are MELI and PDD scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.